Figure 1. Operating Models

Figure 2. MP stock assessment fits using data from 1980 and perfect biomass index

Figure 3. MP stock assessment fits using data from 1960 and perfect biomass index

[1] "RSS"
        year
quantity        60        80
       F 0.4721018 0.4676944
       B 0.2948743 0.3712703

Figure 4. Comparison of current status (\(B/B_{MSY}\) and \(F/F_{MSY}\)) for OM and MP.

Figure 5. MP stock assessment fits using data from 1960 with prior for r and perfect biomass index

Figure 6. MP stock assessment fits using data from 1980 with prior for r and perfect biomass index

Figure 7. Indices, simulated.

Figure 8. Indices, actual

Figure 9. Selection pattern.

Figure 10. Indices, CPUE

Figure 11. Assessment for adult index using data from 1960

Figure 12. Assessment for adult index using data from 1980

Figure 13. Assessment for juvenile index using data from 1960

Figure 14. Assessment for juvenile index using data from 1980

Figure 15. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1960

Figure 16. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1980

Figure 17. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1960

Figure 18. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1980

Figure 19. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1960 and prior for r

Figure 20. Assessment for fisheries dependent index using data from 1960 and prior for r

Figure 21. Relationship between stock status havest rate (blue) and stock (red)

Table 1.

   quantity    index year prior     r  rmse  sd.r  sd.m    sd
1   harvest  perfect 1960  none 0.461 0.404 0.445 0.293 0.659
2   harvest  perfect 1960 prior 0.431 0.417 0.445 0.308 0.693
3   harvest  perfect 1980  none 0.807 0.336 0.445 0.149 0.335
4   harvest  perfect 1980 prior 0.784 0.342 0.445 0.147 0.329
5   harvest juvenile 1960  none 0.250 1.637 0.445 1.694 3.805
6   harvest juvenile 1980  none 0.836 0.247 0.445 0.410 0.920
7   harvest    adult 1960  none 0.217 1.737 0.445 1.782 4.003
8   harvest    adult 1980  none 0.468 0.393 0.445 0.190 0.428
9   harvest  exploit 1960  none 0.213 1.788 0.445 1.833 4.117
10  harvest  exploit 1980  none 0.522 0.379 0.445 0.234 0.526
11  harvest     mfcl 1960  none 0.269 1.703 0.445 1.772 3.979
12  harvest     mfcl 1960 prior 0.325 1.270 0.445 1.346 3.023
13  harvest     mfcl 1980  none 0.746 0.357 0.445 0.133 0.299
14  harvest     mfcl 1980 prior 0.740 0.359 0.445 0.130 0.293
15    stock  perfect 1960  none 0.497 0.300 0.344 0.209 0.608
16    stock  perfect 1960 prior 0.391 0.326 0.344 0.217 0.630
17    stock  perfect 1980  none 0.745 0.231 0.344 0.223 0.649
18    stock  perfect 1980 prior 0.748 0.229 0.344 0.234 0.682
19    stock juvenile 1960  none 0.225 0.393 0.344 0.284 0.826
20    stock juvenile 1980  none 0.598 0.275 0.344 0.193 0.561
21    stock    adult 1960  none 0.361 0.340 0.344 0.238 0.693
22    stock    adult 1980  none 0.481 0.304 0.344 0.209 0.609
23    stock  exploit 1960  none 0.337 0.382 0.344 0.320 0.929
24    stock  exploit 1980  none 0.506 0.303 0.344 0.238 0.691
25    stock     mfcl 1960  none 0.325 0.358 0.344 0.262 0.763
26    stock     mfcl 1960 prior 0.342 0.350 0.344 0.254 0.739
27    stock     mfcl 1980  none 0.685 0.252 0.344 0.200 0.582
28    stock     mfcl 1980 prior 0.686 0.252 0.344 0.201 0.584

Figure 22. Comparison of current status (\(B/B_{MSY}\) and \(F/F_{MSY}\)) for OM and MP.

Figure 23. Kobe

Table 2. ratio between MP and MP values of \(B/B_{MSY}\) and \(F/F_{MSY}\)

          mp         f         b
1   sa60mfcl 0.9140866 0.6730980
2   sa80mfcl 0.5423078 1.3389317
3 sa60mfcl.r 0.8632917 0.7143803
4 sa80mfcl.r 0.5332739 1.3406933
        f         b
1 1.27085 0.6795206